October 3, 2005
October 10, 2005
October 17, 2005 Paper this week was late, but is now updated.
October 24, 2005
October 31, 2005
NEW YORK CITY, N.Y._On the morning of Sept. 11, 2005, New York City auxiliary fire lieutenant Paul Isaac Jr. asserted, yet again, that 9-11 was an inside job. "I know 9-11 was an inside job. The police know it's an inside job; and the firemen know it too," said Isaac.
The ramifications of this statement are immense: One of New York's own firefighters says publicly that 9-11 couldn't have been the work of Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, but instead was planned, coordinated and executed by elements within our own government.
He also added, after pointing to throngs of police officers standing around us, that, "We all have to be very careful about how we handle it."
Isaac reiterated what a 9-11 survivor told this journalist
during our protest at Ground Zero on Sept. 11, 2005_that emergency
radios were buzzing with information about bombs being detonated
inside the World Trade
Center towers.
Also, Isaac directly addressed a gag order that has been placed on firemen and police officers in New York.
"It's amazing how many people are afraid to talk for fear of retaliation or losing their jobs," said Isaac, regarding the FBI gag order placed on law enforcement and fire department officials, preventing them from openly talking about any inside knowledge of 9-11. There is more information related to Isaac circulating in on-line and print reports, so here again we are hearing first-hand evidence from individuals who were on the scene, such as live witness William Rodriguez, saying that the World Trade Center towers were brought down not by the airliner's impact or the resulting jet fuel fires, but instead by a deliberately executed controlled demolition.
Tragically, due to heavy-handed pressure from officials at the city, state and federal levels, we are still not hearing the entire story.
Researcher Vincent Sammartino, who was also at the WTC "open grave site" on the afternoon of Sept. 11, 2005, wrote the following on the on-line news web site APFN: "I just got back from Ground Zero. People know the truth. Half of the police and firemen were coming up to us and telling us that they know that 9-11 was an inside job. They were told not to talk about it. But they were supporting what we were doing. I had tears in my eyes."
Victor Thorn is the author of New World Order Exposed, and co-host of WING TV. For more information, visit Thorn's web site at wingtv.net or write P.O. Box 10495, State College, PA 16805-0495. New World Order Exposed (#1080, $25, 560 pps., softcover) and 9-11 On Trial (#1178, 175 pages, $14, booklet) can be ordered from FIRST AMENDMENT BOOKS. Write 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100, Washington, D.C. 20003. Call toll free 1-888-699-NEWS (6397) to order by Visa or MasterCard.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
United Nations bureaucrats, meeting in New York, are trying to shove through Bilderberg's demand for a direct tax on world citizens but, so far, the United States is firmly opposed. UN bureaucrats used euphemisms to hide their tax plan in the 40-page "Draft Outcome Document of the High-Level Plenary Meeting of the General Assembly of September 2005."
The document, if finally agreed upon, is to be taken up by 170 heads of state at the UN. It calls for "innovative and additional sources of financing for development on a public, private, domestic or external basis" and "solidarity contributions on plane tickets to finance development projects" and "other solidarity contributions that would be nationally applied and internationally coordinated."
For years, Bilderberg has pressed for a direct UN tax on the world, and for at least three years such proposals have been pending before the world body. Bilderberg's favorite form of UN taxes has been a levy of 10 cents a gallon on oil. This would, initially, be so small the consumer would not notice the fraction of a penny on gasoline, even with today's sky-high prices. But the principle would be established and, like the U.S. income tax, it would be tuned up in the years ahead.
The oil tax would be imposed under the language of "other solidarity contributions."
There is a growing awareness of this threat to U.S. sovereignty. Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) secured unanimous agreement in the House to oppose any UN taxes. The Senate should enact the same prohibition. At the UN, U.S. Ambassador John Bolton has taken this document apart, demanding 40 changes, including purging language supporting taxing authority for the UN. "The U.S. does not accept . . . global taxes," Bolton wrote.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
There are currently at least 20 million illegal aliens living in the United States, costing taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars for social services, police protection and medical care. Not to be overlooked are the dozens of state and federal agencies that have been created to deal with this growing problem.
According to Diana Mull, president of Californians for Population Stabilization and an expert on immigration, the number of undocumented migrants in the United States is currently more than the entire population of New York State. It is larger than the combined populations of Alaska, Arkansas, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Maine, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire and New Mexico.
Using figures recently cited in a report by the investment-banking firm of Bear Stearns, Mull says that as many as 3 million illegal aliens are entering the U.S. annually and the number is growing. Unchecked illegal immigration is damaging the U.S. economy and putting millions of Americans out of work.
And yet, President Bush adamantly refuses to do anything to stop illegal aliens from entering the United States.
Bear Stearn's statistics are in stark contrast to U.S. Census Bureau figures. Census numbers have been assailed as grossly underestimating the problem, primarily because most illegals chose not to report their presence to a census taker.
The banking and securities firm's research was compiled from a number of sources, including incidences of border crossings, foreign remittances housing permits, school enrollments and language proficiency programs.
The report, compiled by researchers Robert Justich and Betty Ng, concludes that the sheer numbers of illegals in America will be of "major significance" in the nations future.
It is estimated that local state and federal agencies are paying out more than $30 billion annually to provide illegal aliens with such services as education, law enforcement and health care.
In addition, the money being paid to foreign workers ‘under the table" is costing the nation as much as $35 billion annually in lost tax revenue, which must be made up by those that report their income and pay their taxes.
According to the financial publication, W Magazine, which extensively covered the Bear Steams report, "The best guess as to the size of the output of this shadow economy is about $970 billion annually," paid "under the table," which, if taxed, could erase the nation's current budget deficit.
Why have the Bush and previous administrations not made any meaningful efforts to bring this propulation invasion to a halt?
The answer could be found in part in the conclusion of Ms. Hull - that this large underground work force, estimated to be accounting for 8 percent of the nation's workers, or 12 to 15 million U.S. jobs, "contributes to a skewed economic view, helping news look rosier, including government productivity reports that may be reflecting the outputs but not the complete picture on labor inputs.
This, Ms. Hull states, inflates the "often-touted high productivity numbers in the United States," making the administration look good in the national media and, thus, hoodwinking the dollar-bled U.S. taxpayers.
The cost of supporting the illegals is devastating as one example illustrates.
Wages to cheap alien workers have actually decreased the average annual earning of all Americans by as much as 6 percent.
Says Ms. Hull: "the short-term benefits of cheap labor - like any purported free lunch - have a steep price for Americans pushed out of the work force and for taxpayers who pick up the billions of dollars in taxes unpaid by the underground economy."
Across America, illegal aliens occupy subsidized housing, which is intended of house poor American citizens. But illegals, who report no income, are occupying apartments, paid for by Housing and Urban Development or the Department of Agriculture's Rural Housing Service to the tune of hundreds of dollars a month.
In many cases illegal aliens, who are being paid under the table, receive additional money in federal food stamps.
In some areas, the gang violence and drug trafficking has increased as a result of illegal immigration. Today, some police departments are actually picking up illegal aliens, driving them to the nearest bus station, and then buying them tickets to go somewhere else, just so local law enforcement will not have to deal with them anymore.
Consider the current state of affairs in America's most populous state, California.
In the past 40 years, the Golden State's population has doubled,
virtually all of which is due to immigration.
|Top|
Insured losses from Katrina are expected to hit $60 billion - more than three times the costs of 9-11 and Hurricane Andrew in 1992 - and drive insurance costs skyward. Insurance analysts say some of the 62 "syndicates" of Lloyd's of London may be forced out of business, with investors, according to Lloyd's rules, having to pay millions from their own pockets or borrow the money of their reserves cannot pay all the claims. Hardest hit insurers so far are Allstate and State Farm of Louisiana and Mississippi.
The giant "re-insurance" companies (Munich Re, Swiss Re, Berkshire Hathaway of Warren Buffet, etc.) cover such insurers as Allstate and State Farm against huge claims so they can still make the payouts to tens of thousands of victims. The re-insurancers, however, can and must raise their rates to insurance companies enormously in the wake of constant hurricanes and other recent disasters around America and the world.
INSURANCE REGULATORS
Regulators in many states, such as Louisiana and Mississippi, will not permit the insurance companies to also jack up premiums, which would devastate the ordinary homeowner. Insurers' only choice may be to leave such states entirely. Many states require any insurance company that wants to operate there to carry all the major forms of coverage.
As for Florida, slammed by seven hurricanes in 13 months, which many ascribe to rising ocean temperatures, hurricane and flood insurance premiums have skyrocketed with the Tallahassee government's permission. For Floridians, especially retirees, who are unable to pay stratospheric premiums to protect their house investment and also eat, the state has a fund that guarantees coverage to everyone. Only one problem the state fund does not cover the first 2 percent of losses. With the current real estate inflation, many homes on the Atlantic Coast are worth in the neighborhood of $500,000, hence an unpaid loss for the victim of $10,000 for the retiree or young family.
SKEEDADDLING
According to the Vero Beach [Fla.] Journal, the Sunshine State's two largest insurers, State Farm and Allstate, are contemplating leaving Florida with its 16 million consumers entirely because of the large numbers of hurricanes. The two coverage giants are also the top automobile insurers in the state. More and more insurers refuse at the very least to cover any house on the Atlantic side of the state.
As Floridians have discovered, and New Orleanians will too, hurricane damage does not cover water damage, just the wind taking the roof off and objects smashing windows and walls. Flood insurance does cover the house against water, but not against the airborne roof and other "wind-caused" woes.
If during the flood a floating object drifts by and snaps of a hydrant, the insurer may claim the spewing hydrant, not the flood, caused the water damage to the house - anything to reduce the company's losses.
Few people have taken out the double "wind and water" policies, which are merely an option. Insurance agents do not insist that consumers get both policies because of sticker shock over the hair-raising premiums.
And for many people living in New Orleans, a city below sea
level, flood insurance was never an option.
|Top|
Some economists estimate that rebuilding New Orleans and other areas impacted by Hurricane Katrina will cost taxpayers at least $200 billion, which may be a conservative figure considering it could take decades to fully restore the city. The problem is that our Treasury does not have an extra $200 billion on hand. This means the money either will be printed or borrowed, both of which bode ill for the American economy.
Several conservatives in Congress, however, are cautioning against throwing more and more taxpayer money at the problem with no accountability. While we all want to help the victims of Katrina, we must remember that no one is better off if we create record deficits that hobble our children and grandchildren for generations.
The tragic scenes of abject poverty and distress in Hew Orleans prompted two emotional reactions. One side claims Katrina proves there is not enough government welfare and government spending in general. The other side claims we need to pump billions of new dollars into FEMA, the very agency that performed so badly, while giving it extraordinary new police powers.
Both side simply assume hundreds of billions of dollars in new government spending are needed. But history shows us that "compassionate" deficit spending hurts poor people the most by lowering the value of the dollar.
When the Treasury prints new money, the ruling class benefits because they can cash in on inflated assets like stock or real estate early in the cycle of printing and spending. The poor, by contrast, are totally dependant on the immediate buying power of their meager resources.
A fiat money system that engenders cycles of new money and deficit spending is not the savior of the poor, but rather their worst enemy. Every new dollar makes the dollars that eventually trickle down to the poorest Americans worth less and less. Do we really believe we can resurrect New Orleans, and address the needs of her poorest citizens, by printing money out of thin air?
Katrina also has exposed the failed welfare policies of the past 60 years. In New Orleans, hundreds of thousands of impoverished citizens lacked any resources to safeguard their families and their property from the storm. Virtually everyone who stayed behind was poor. It is time to recognize that government assistance over several generations did not eradicate poverty in New Orleans, but rather created a deadly form of dependency on government.
Congress reacted to Katrina in the expected irresponsible manner. It immediately appropriated over $60 billion with little planning or debate. As with all rapid government expenditures, the amount of waste and mismanagement will be staggering.
Congress knows it won't need to raise taxes to pay the bill, because the Federal Reserve will accommodate reckless deficit spending.
My simple suggestion to my colleagues is this: Find dollar-for-dollar offsets for all hurricane relief spending while public attention remains focused on the destruction in New Orleans.
Once interest in Katrina fades, other spending priorities will ressert themselves and any sense that tax dollars are finite will be lost.
Congressional spending habits, in combination with our flawed
monetary system, could bring us a financial whirlwind that makes
Hurricand Katrina look like a minor storm.
Ron Paul, a medical
doctor, is a Republican member of the U.S. congress who represents
the 14th district of Texas. Often called "Dr. No" because
he bucks his party establishment, refusing to support policies
contrary to traditional constitutional principles. Paul was the
Libertarian Party presidential candidate in 1984. Call his office
toll free at: 1-888-322-1414 or visit his website at www.ronpaul.org.
|Top|
Once again, agenda-driven congressmen have slipped an amendment expanding federal "hate crimes" into an innocent-sounding "bill to protect children," and the House - with most members unaware of the mischief - passed the measure 223-199.
Some members approved the bill (H.R. 3132), they said, because they wanted the Children's Safety Act to pass and were confident that the hate crimes amendment would be killed in a conference with the Senate, which has happened several times in recent years. But there is a danger that the Senate will approve the Hate Crimes Prevention Act amendment (Amendment 25; formerly H.R. 2662) as passed by the House, eliminating the need for a conference and sending it directly to President Bush.
Thus, say congressional functionaries, it is important for Americans to make their senators aware of the mischief in the child safety legislation, which strengthens the monitoring of child sex offenders and increases penalties for molestation.
In recent years, child sex offenders have moved to other states after being released to molest more children. Under the Interstate Commerce clause, Congress claimed a right to act.
The chairman of the 100-member House Republican committee, Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.), said conservatives are outraged that the child's safety bill was brought to the floor under an "open rule," meaning unlimited amendments could be proposed and voted on.
"House conservatives barraged me with their frustration and concern over this bill,' said Pence. "Our guys are starting to spoil for a fight."the hate crimes amendment would federalize local crimes if animosity toward protected groups is suspected.
There are three fatal flaws in hate crimes laws. They create ‘thought police," where, at the whim of those in power, people can be prosecuted for what cops think they think.
They federalize local crimes, extending the outreach of Washington bureaucrats to your neighborhood where the local cop once walked the beat. As it stands today, states and localities deal much more effectively with these crimes - most with harsher punishment than Washington provides.
They are also inconsistent. A black person can attack a white person, stating that he is doing so because he hates the color of the white person's skin. But that is not a "hate crime" as defined by the federal law. Reverse the situation, and the crime suddenly becomes motivated by "hate".
Under the proposed law, the next step is for a minister, preaching from the Bible that pronounces homosexuality a sin, to be arrested at his pulpit and charged with a "hate crime".
Granting government the ability to be able to reach into our minds and prosecute us for our thoughts sets a dangerous precedent for all Americans.
"We gave the far left a ripe opportunity for success,"
Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) said of the open rule. "As
members of the majority party, we're asking: How could we allow
this to happen? Why did we give the opposition an easy route to
victory?"
|Top|
The
hurricanes that recently devastated the Gulf Coast now threaten
constitutional government.
President Bush has Congress seriously considering allowing the U.S. military to enter a state and take over in the event of a national disaster, countrywide epidemic or terrorist attack.
Under present law and policy, dating back to the Founders, who feared a "national police force," the federal military defends U.S. shores against foreign invaders and has no domestic role.
It was Abraham Lincoln who set the precedent that, if a president declares a state to be in rebellion against the United States, he can order troops there regardless of whether the governor asks for them. These restrictions on the central government were important to the Founders, who insisted on the Second Amendment right to bear arms to assure Americans that if the national government they created became as oppressive as the British government they overthrew, the people would have the means to resist.
To fortify the Constitution's separation of powers on the military issue, in 1878, Congress passed Posse Comitatus legislation prohibiting the armed forces from enforcing domestic law.
This is no impediment to rescue efforts; a governor can always ask the president for federal help, which can arrive and be "pre-positioned" before the storm hits. But today, there is a danger that ignorant congressmen will approve legislation that would allow a president to order federal troops into a state whether or not the governor or people want them by merely deciding that there is a state of emergency.
Does a "natural disaster . . . enable the Defense Department to become the lead agency in coordinating and leading the response effort?" Bush asked rhetorically. "That's going to be a very important consideration for Congress to think about."
Bush packaged his plan to win authority to use the military as a national police force by tactically sandwiching it into a proposal to have the federal government be the first responder with total control in the event of a terrorist attack, a natural disaster or an epidemic.
Bush already has the authority on terrorist attacks, which can, in some cases, be an act of war. The Army defends America at war even on the home front. On the other hand, in cases of storms, flooding, earthquakes or pandemics, the line is not so obvious.
"It may require change of law," Bush said. "It's very important for us as we look at the lessons of Katrina to think about other scenarios that might require a well planned, significant federal response - right off the bat - to provide stability."
Homeland Security Czar Michael Chertoff went one step further saying recently that federal authorities should have overruled local and state officials in the mess following Hurricane Katrina and simply seized control of disaster areas.
Imposing "stability" during any catastrophe would likely require federal troops to arrest looters, seize firearms and perform other questionable law-enforcement acts in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.
But, ominously, the federal government has had the military practicing for occupying localities for years. On grounds that much of modern combat is in urban areas, the Army has been conducting street-by-street drills, complete with overhead helicopters, for at least a decade.
In New Orleans, lawmen confiscated guns from the homes of law-abiding citizens at the very moment muggers, looters and rapists were reportedly prowling the streets to loot, rob and kill.
Quick legal action by the National Rifle Association resulted in a federal court stopping the gun confiscation.
But a federal army occupying a stormy state could have carried out the same operations with more power and with much more efficiency.
What other motive could there be than to turn the U.S. military into a domestic police force?
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are
free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American
Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington,
D.C. 20003
|Top|
Street theater protesters heaped humorous ridicule upon lawmakers who support so-called "hate crimes" legislation by acting out scenes with uniformed "Thought Police" seemingly abusing people wearing prison stripes while senators, staff members and others entered and left the Dirksen Senate Office Building.
As "police" sang, "All your thoughts I will control...." while banging on the heads of "prisoners" held for the crime of "Thinking," Eugene Delgaudio, president of the Virginia-based conservative group Public Advocate of the United States, passed out ‘Go Directly to Jail!" cards to staffers, lawmakers and passersby.
Most senators and staffers came and went at the Dirksen Building with dour looks on their faces, refusing the card - actually, an 8-by 11-inch poster explaining why criminalizing thought is both harmful and silly.
But inside, the windows filled with curious faces.
A few individuals accepted the cards, sometimes smiling and nodding in agreement. Tourists enjoyed the unusual scene, having their photographs taken in front of the group.
Public Advocate "opposes the inclusion of the Kennedy Thought Control Bill into the Children's Safety Act because the legislation would punish thoughts rather than actions and restrict the ability of states to prosecute violent offenders," the group said in a statement. The group believes that punishment for all violent crimes should be increased, regardless of the political correctness of the offense.
All states have laws that punish violent crimes, typically more harshly than the penalties now provided under federal hate crime laws. But aside from the necessary element of mens rea, or evil intent, they punish the act, without trying to look into the perpetrator's head to see whether it was a crime motivated by dislike of an individual or group that has been specifically singled out by the government to require more protection than other Americans. It is also an attempt to expand federal control to your neighborhood, by making local crimes "federal."
Women and racial, ethnic and religious minorities are already covered under federal hate crime laws. The new bill adds homosexuals and others to the protected list. Specifically, it would expand federal protection to people victimized because of their actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender, gender identity and disability.
For example, if a bicyclist pedaling furiously along a road ran into a pedestrian and shouted, "You fool; are you deaf or something?" under this provision, he would then be guilty of a hate crime, regardless whether or not the pedestrian was actually deaf and thus disabled.
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) Has championed this violation of free speech from the outset. Using different sponsors, he has slipped the bill into huge, must-pass spending measures several times in recent years, with most lawmakers unaware of the amendment until the big package is passed.
This year, Rep, John Conyers (D-Mich.) Slipped it into the House-passed child-protection measure. There is a danger, congressional staffers warn, that the Senate will simply approve the House bill without change, sending it directly to President Bush and avoiding a conference. It was in conference that the Kennedy mischief has been discovered and killed in the past three years.
"All your thoughts I will control...."sang the choir
of "cops" and prisoners. "No more thinking,"
yelled a "cop" of the "Public Advocate Thought
Control Police" who was beating on the head of a man dressed
in prisoner's clothes.
|Top|
Dr. Henry Niman has been dedicating his life as a microbiologist to tracking the mysterious avian flu outbreaks in almost every corner of the world for the last two years. Niman who did his postgraduate work at the University of Southern California and now lives in Pittsburgh, isn't in the business of scaring people with trumped-up biological conspiracy theories. But his is in the complicated business of trying to figure out how viruses mutate and how to best protect mankind against a flu pandemic that could kill millions of people worldwide.
Niman says the avian flu, in one of its many mutated forms, is coming to America, the only questions remaining are when, what strain and how deadly.
Niman says don't rely on the government for advice, assistance or an immediate vaccine, since the United States, as well as the rest of the world, is playing a game of catch-up against the many strains of H5N1 avian flu.
"The present pandemic vaccines have proven ineffective in 2004 for the Vietnam strain, and they are still ineffective for what is being called the wild bird flu strain and others," said Niman recently in an extended conversation from his Pittsburgh home. "We've known about the seriousness of H5N1 mutations and different forms of the virus for some time. We've had avian flu before, but this year the situation is extremely critical for a variety of reasons, including the many different strains detected and the unusually high mortality rate for some of those strains."
MUCH CONTROVERSY
Although there has been much controversy about whether human-to-human contact has been confirmed in H5N1 cases, Niman said 15 to 20 clusters have been uncovered overseas and human-to-human passage of the deadly virus has been known since 2004.
He said what compounds the problem is the World Health Organization (WHO) still refuses to acknowledge Human-to human passage of the Vietnam-type strain even though strong evidence exists such as three family members in Jakarta who all died from avian flu with in a short period of time.
As far as the United States is concerned, Niman says, "If it comes this year and it's the wild bird flu strain, it will come from the north by way of bird migration. If it is the Vietnam strain, it will come from a person landing here on an airplane and how and when that will occur is anybody's guess."
Niman said the avian flu symptoms, which are killing a high percentage of people overseas, include pneumonia, respiratory problems, internal bleeding and organ failure.
Regarding the spread of the wild bird flu strain, he recently wrote: ‘Two wild birds - a duck and a magpie have been found dead near Lake Sharonur in the Russian republic of Tannu Tuva - the firs such case among wild birds reported.
"The wild bird deaths described above may signal more H5N1 wild bird flu in southern Russia, just north of outbreaks reported in Mongolia. Mongolia invited WHO to help control the wild bird deaths, which were H5N1 positive," he said.
Asked how he would protect is family against the many H5N1 strains he tracks on a daily basis, he added:
"There really aren't many alternatives, but I would stock up on antiviral medication. Besides that, devise a plan to isolate yourself with enough food and water for an extended period of time.
"Keep your eyes open, because the bird flu is coming,
and I don't think the government will be much help," he said.
|Top|
George W. Bush will go down in history as the president who fiddled while America lost its superpower status. Bush used deceit and hysteria to lead America into a war that is bleeding the United States economically, militarily and diplomatically. The war is being fought with hundreds of billions of dollars borrowed from foreigners. The war is bleeding the military of troops and commitments. The war has ended the U.S. claim to moral leadership and exposed the United States as a reckless and aggressive power.
Focused on a concocted "war on terrorism," the Bush administration diverted money from the New Orleans levees to Iraq, with the consequence that the United States now has a $100 billion rebuild bill on top of the war bill.
The United States is do short of troops that neo-conservatives are advocating the use of foreign mercenaries paid with U.S. citizenship.
U.S. efforts to isolate Iran have been blocked by Russia and China, nuclear powers that Bush cannot bully.
The Iraqi war has three beneficiaries: al Qaeda, Iran, and U.S. war industries and Bush-Cheney cronies who receive no-bid contracts. Everyone else is a loser.
The War has bestowed on al Qaeda recruits, prestige and a training ground.
The war has allied Iran with Iraq's Shiite majority.
The war has brought soaring profits to the military industries and the firms with reconstruction contracts at the expense of 20,000 U.S. military casualties and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilian casualties.
The republican Party is a loser, because its hidebound support for the war is isolating the party from public opinion.
The Democratic Party is a loser, because its cowardly acquiescence in a war that is opposed by the majority of its members is making the party irrelevant.
The latest polls show that a majority of Americans believe the United States cannot win against the Iraq insurgency. The majority supports withdrawal and the redirection of war spending to rebuilding New Orleans. Despite the clarity of the public's wishes, the Republican Party continues to support the unpopular war.
The war has exposed the U.S. as a reckless and aggressive power.
With the exceptions of Reps. Cynthia McKinney and John Conyers, Democrats fled the scene of the Sept. 24 antiwar rally in Washington. The cynical Democrats are apparently owned by the same interest groups that own the Republicans and are refusing the mantle of majority party that the electorate is offering to the party that will end the war.
The bush administration is churning out red ink in excess of $1 trillion annually. The federal budget deficit is approaching $500 billion. The U.S. trade deficit is approaching $700 billion.
The budget deficit is being financed by foreigners, primarily Asians who now hold enough U.S. government debt to exercise poser over U.S. interest rates and the value of the dollar whenever they decide to use the power that Bush has placed in their hands.
The trade deficit is being financed by turning over the ownership of U.S. assets and future income streams to foreigners, making Americans forever poorer from the loss of accumulated wealth.
For the time being, China is willing to accumulate U.S. assets as a way of taking over our consumer markets, attracting U.S. manufacturing industry with cheap labor subsidized by artificial currency values, and gaining our technology.
China's strategy is to overvalue the U.S. dollar in order to encourage the transfer of U.S. economic capabilities to China. China's strategy gives artificial value to the dollar and keeps U.S. interest rates at an artificial low.
However, as Asia achieves its goal of pre-eminence in manufacturing, innovation and product development, the strategy will change. Once china completes its acquisition of U.S. capabilities, it will no longer have a reason to support the dollar.
When the dollar goes, it will affect costs, profits, interest rates and living standards in dramatic ways. Costs and interest rates will soar, and profits, living standards, equity values, bond prices and real estate will plummet.
These unpleasant events await only Asia's decision to curtail its support for U.S. red ink. That will happen when this support no longer serves Asia's interest.
When Asia pulls the plug on the dollar, the U.S. government will find that monetary and fiscal policy are powerless to offset the consequences.
Compared to U.S. budget and trade deficits, terrorists are a minor concern. The greatest danger that the United States faces is the dollar's loss of reserve currency role. This would be an impoverishing event, one from which the United States would not recover.
An intelligent government sincerely concerned with homeland security would find a way to halt the global labor arbitrage that is stripping the American economy of high value-added jobs and manufacturing capability, thereby causing the U.S. trade deficit to explode. The loss of tax base that results when U.S. companies outsource jobs and relocate production abroad makes it ever more difficult to balance a budget strained by war, natural disasters, and demographic impact on Social Security and Medicare.
Global labor arbitrage is rapidly dismantling the ladders of upward mobility and thereby endangering American political stability. This threat is far greater than any Osama bin Laden can mount.
Time is running out for Republicans and Democrats to escape from the distraction of a pointless war and to focus on the real threats that endanger the United states of America. © 2005 Creators Syndicate, Inc
Paul Craig Roberts
a nationally syndicated columnist and former editor at The
Wall Street Journal, is the author of several books. He has
been associated with the Hoover Institution, and the Institute
for Political Economy and from 1981 to 1982 served as assistant
secretary of the treasury for economic policy.
|Top|
More and more European news outlets are bucking the ban on exposing the shadowy globalist group known as Bilderberg and reporting in depth on this secret gathering of king makers and power elites.
While Bilderberg's top man insists that it is just a good old boys club, another Bilderberg participant readily admits it holds influence in global decision making, BBC News reports from London.
"Will Hutton, an economic analyst and former newspaper editor who attended a Bilderberg meeting in 1997, says people take part in these networks in order to influence the way the world works, to create what he calls ‘the international common sense' about policy," BBC said.
"On every issue that might influence your business you will hear first hand the people who are actually making those decisions and you will play a part in helping them make those decisions and formulating the common sense," BBC quotes Hutton.
"And that ‘common sense' is one which supports the interests of Bilderberg's main participants—in particular free trade," BBC told listeners, who number in the millions.
"Viscount Davignon says that at the annual meetings, ‘automatically around the table you have internationalists'—people who support the work of the World Trade Organization, transatlantic cooperation and European integration."
Viscount Etienne Davignon, 73, is chairman of Bilderberg and a former European commissioner. Today, Davignon is a wealthy banker and is known as the public face behind the unification of Europe under one currency, the euro.
BBC's Bill Hayton interviewed him at his office in Brussels. Hayton correctly called it an "extremely rare interview."
"I don't think we are a global ruling class because I don't think a global ruling class exists," Davignon told BBC listeners. "I simply think it's people who have influence interested to speak to other people who have influence."
Davignon said "business influences society and politics influences society—that's purely common sense. It's not that business contests the right of democratically elected leaders to lead."
"For Bilderberg critics the fact that there is almost no publicity about the annual meetings is proof they are up to no good," BBC's Hayton said on air. "Jim Tucker, senior editor of American Free Press, for example, alleges they organize wars and elect and depose political leaders. He describes the group as simply ‘evil.' So where does the truth lie?"
Bilderberg meetings "often feature future political leaders
shortly before they become household names," Hayton said.
"Bill Clinton went in 1991, while still governor of Arkansas.
Tony Blair was there two years later while still an
opposition member of Parliament. All the recent presidents of
the European Commission attended Bilderberg meetings before they
were appointed."
BBC did not mention that Blair also attended in 1998 as prime minister.
NO ACCIDENT
Davignon explained that Bilderberg's steering committee "does its best assessment of who are the bright new boys or girls in the beginning phase of their career who would like to get known. . . . It's not a total accident."
"Professor Kees van der Piji of Sussex University in Britain says such private networks of corporate and political leaders play an informal but crucial role in the modern world," Hayton said. He quotes the professor:
" ‘There need to be places where these people can think about the main challenges ahead, coordinate where policies should be going, and find out where there could be a consensus.' "
This benign image of Bilderberg, however, denies reality. A simple glance at the secret roster of attendees shows it is composed of the wealthy elites, who are all seeking similar goals—increasing their power and profits, while turning the rest of us into serfs on the global plantation.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
Last month at its "World Summit" in New York, the United Nations took another big step toward destroying national sovereignty - a step that could threaten the United States in the future. The UN passed a resolution at this summit that, among other things, establishes a "Peacebuilding Commission, creates a worldwide UN "democracy fund," and most troublingly codifies the dangerous "Responsibility to Protect" report as part of UN policy. The three are certainly interrelated
I have been concerned for some time about the establishment of a UN Peacebuilding Commission, an idea I first found so troubling when the International Relations Committee marked-up the UN Reform Act containing this provision earlier this year.
According to the UN, this commission will bring together the UN Security council members, major donor states, major troop contributing countries, United Nations organizations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund to develop and integrate conflict prevention, post-conflict reconstruction, and long-term development policies and strategies.
The commission will serve as the key coordinating body for the design and implementation of military, humanitarian, and civil administration aspects of complex missions.
Think of this as the core of a future UN army that will claim the right to intervene in any conflict anywhere.
The misnamed "Democracy Fund" created at the World forum may well provide the funding for this UN army.
We must ask ourselves whether this "global democracy fund" will be used to undermine or overthrow elected governments that do not meet some UN-created democratic criteria. Will it be used to further the kinds of color-coded revolutions we have seen from East Europe to the Middle East, which far from being genuine expressions of popular will are in fact fomented with outside money and influence? Could it eventually be used against the United States? What if the United states is determined to be lacking when it comes to UN-defined democratic responsibilities such as providing free public housing or universal healthcare?
Most disturbing, however, is the UN adoption of the "Responsibility to Protect," a report of the International Commission of Intervention and State Sovereignty, which can be found on the Internet at iciss.ca/report-en
Whenever the UN names a commission to study intervention and state sovereignty you can bet that it is to promote the former and undermine the latter. This "Responsibility to Protect" report adopted by the UN commits member states to intervene in the internal affairs of other sovereign states if the state in question does not protect its population from "genocide war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity," or does not protect its population from the "incitement" to such crimes. Who determines the criteria for this policy of global pre-emption? The UN, of course.
While it may be true that the United States exerts considerable control over the United Nations at present, this may not always be the case. It is certainly conceivable that at some future date a weakened United States may face a financially and militarily stronger China, for example, that the U.S. has not lived up to its ‘responsibility to protect."
This is the lesson for conservatives who are cheering on a
"reform" process that is actually strengthening the
United Nations. What will happen when the sovereignty we undermine
through measure like this turns out to be our own?
|Top|
The U.S. Supreme court has declared war on God in America, says a former Republican congressman from California, who recently gave an exclusive interview to American Free Press. For 50 years now the federal judiciary at all levels has steadily taken away the traditional freedom of all Americans. However, recent polls indicate that 75 percent of the people want this freedom restored.
It will be restored, and God will once again return to the public square, from which he has been kept for the past 50 years, says William E. Dannemeyer, who served six terms in the U.S. House.
Dannemeyer is leading the charge to bring God back to the schools, community assemblies and other public meeting places. He served in the House of Representatives from 1979-1992, when he ran for the U.S. senate but faile to win the GOP nomination.
He currently serves as the unpaid co-chairman of the Americans for Voluntary School Prayer. His distinguished record in the House of Representatives and his knowledge of the workings of government are invaluable in this fight to save U.S. culture, which he believes if being destroyed.
Two new bills have been introduced in Congress to protect Americans' freedom to acknowledge God. They are S.520 in the Senate and its companion bill H.R. 1070 in the House of Representatives.
Known as the Constitution Restoration Act of 2005, the bill was introduced in the Senate by Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) And has been referred to the Judiciary Committee. It has eight cosponsors: Wayne Allard (R-Col.), Jim bunning (R-Ky.), Richard Burr (R-N.C.), Sam Brownback (R-Kans.), Conrad R. Burns (R-Mont.) Larry E. Craig (R-Idaho), James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.), and Trent Lott, (R-Miss.). In the House there are currently 34 sponsors.
Judge Roy Moore, the nationally renowned fighter for the freedom to have the Ten Commandments displayed in a courthouse, has announced his candidacy for governor of Alabama. Moore testified before the judiciary subcommittee on the courts, chaired by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.).
Sec. 1260 of S. 520 clearly states: "Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an entity of federal, state or local government, or against an officer or agent of federal, state or local government (whether or not acting in official or personal capacity), concerning that entity's officer's or agent's acknowledgment of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty or government."
S. 250, sec. 1370, states: "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the district courts shall not have jurisdiction of a matter if the Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction to review that matter by reason of Section 1260 of this title."\
Title II - Interpretation, sec. 201 states: "In interpreting and applying the Constitution of the United states, a court of the United states may not rely upon any commission, law, administrative rule, executive order, directive, policy, judicial decision or any other action of any foreign states or international organization or agency, other than English constitutional can common law up to the time of the adoption of the Constitution of the United States.
Dannemeyer told AFP that it is imperative that every God-loving citizen contact his two senators and representative and urge them to support S. 520 or H.R. 1070. The chairman of the senate Judiciary Committee is Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) And James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.).
Dannemeyer pointed out that these bills are statutes, and they utilize Article III, sec. 2.2, of the constitution to except matter from the jurisdiction of the courts. They allow the expression of faith in public, in public school prayer, the Ten commandments in public buildings and God in the Pledge of Allegiance.
According to Dannemeyer, "In May of 2005, at San Diego, Calif., a dance teacher working for a middle school district was terminated from her job after a complaint that she used religious music and also included a classical piece by J.S. bach, sung in Latin and a song in Swahili that translated ‘Praise God."
"Her firing was contrary to California law. Which allows instructors to use references to religion when teaching and this law specifically includes dance instruction."
When Dannemeyer speaks of the efforts of the GOP to restore God in the public square, he does do in the spirit of nonpartisanship. He points out that "the leadership of the Democratic Party (elected members of congress) has abandoned the vast majority of the people registered in the Democratic Party in America and given their votes in congress on this issue to the ACLU, People for the American Way and National Education Association.
"For example, in 1998, in the House of Representatives, we brought a constitutional amendment to a vote in the House, H.J. Res. 78, to allow voluntary prayer in public schools. Eighty-six percent of the Republicans and 13.4 percent of the Democrats voted for it, which means that 12.3 percent of the Republicans voted no, along with 86.6 percent of the Democrats voting against the measure. It passed by a majority of 224-203, but not by the required two-thirds. The Senate did not vote on the measure at all."
Dannemeyer has always had an interest in the federal budget. Of today's runaway spending and the resulting growing debt, Dannemeyer said: there is no political force today in Washington to restrain spending. The GOP leaders have been stricken by the virus of power, which has trumped their commitment to fiscal integrity.
"The time to act is now, before it is too late,"
said Dannemeyer.
|Top|
The biased U.S. mainstream press has again let down the people, distorting facts and slanting story lines. No better example of such shenanigans exists than the recent reporting by FOX News, The Weekly Standard and all big city dailies, including The New York Times, regarding the events surrounding the court proceedings of Saddam Hussein scheduled for Oct. 19.
These outlets intentionally slanted recent interviews with the distinguished and well-respected international human rights attorney and professor, Dr. Curtis Doebbler, making it appear as if the rule of law has been followed to the letter in the Hussein case. But nothing is further from the truth, according to Doebbler.
What is even more troubling is that when Doebbler told his story in the neo-con party line media outlets, many of his statements were intentionally left out or paraphrased to give the sense that Hussein's defense attorneys were actually being given a fair shot at representing their client.
"The first thing I have to clear up from what the press has reported is that neither am I nor is former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark really representing or truly can be called Saddam Hussein's attorney," said Doebbler in a telephone conversation this week from New York.
Doebbler cites Article 14 of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights as precedent, pointing out that it is a longstanding international agreement that mandates a defendant be given a right to a lawyer and the lawyer, in turn, be given adequate facilities to prepare a defense.
ATTORNEYS?
Since Doebbler and Clark have been given little, if any time, to even see or visit with their client, Doebbler insists neither of them could be called the attorney representing Saddam.
"We are willing to represent Mr. Hussein," said Doebbler. "Mr. Clark and I have a signed power of representation from him. But if you do not have access to your client, I would rather have my little sister represent him.
"And what is really ridiculous is that the news publications covering this story always start out by saying numerous lawyers are representing him, but this is totally wrong," said Doebbler.
Doebbler believes the government trial should not go forward since the tribunal itself does not meet international law standards of impartiality and fairness.
"The court set up in Baghdad is not only biased, but it is incompetent and totally lacking any type of legal credibility normally associated with international cases," said Doebbler.
"As lawyers we hope the rule of law will be respected and thus far this is not the case.
Actually, Doebbler contends that the whole concept behind the tribunal is illegal.
"There is an overwhelming number of jurists and statesmen around the world, bound by international law, who openly recognize the invasion of Iraq as a preemptive strike and in violation of all sound principles of international law," said Doebbler. "And, it's important to note, that one cannot create legal rights out of an illegal act, meaning what's going in the Hussein trial has no legal merit to begin with."
HARASSMENT OF LAWYER
Another important fact about the Saddam trial ignored by the American press concerns the harassment of the only attorney to be officially appointed by the Iraqi court.
Kalel al Dolami, an Iraqi lawyer assigned to Saddam's case as the initial legal contact in Baghdad, never has been allowed to visit with his "client" privately. Thus he, in accordance with Doebbler's remarks, can hardly be considered to be truly representing Saddam either.
Equally shocking, al Dolami has accused U.S. operatives of outright harassment, including breaking into his Baghdad home and stealing and destroying legal documents related to Saddam's case.
Although Doebbler and al Dolami have tried to bring these violations to the attention of the press and authorities, they have never surfaced in the American media and never been investigated by Iraqi nor U.S. authorities.
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute
- as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645
Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
|Top|
Against the wishes of President Bush, a Republican movement
opposing open borders has forced its way to the forefront. A letter
authored by a sizable coalition of GOP solons notified the Bush
administration they oppose "guest worker" programs,
favored by Bush, until existing immigration laws are better enforced.
Eighty-two House members signed the letter, including Reps.
Tom Tancredo (Col.),
Hohn Hostettler (Ind.) and Lamar Smith (Tex.). Some patriots are
already suggesting Tancredo should be the next U.S. president.
The letter states that while guest worker and amnesty provisions have a history of being implemented by the executive branch, enforcement provisions have been ignored. The solons believe this has resulted in large increases in illegal immigration.
"People need to see that the current laws against illegal immigration are being enforced before any guest worker program can be considered," the members state.
The letter cites examples of the administration's reluctance to enforce the law, including the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act, in which amnesties for farm workers and other undocumented migrants were implemented, but employer sanctions and other enforcement provisions were not.
The 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act is also provided as an example of the government's unwillingness to enforce the law. The act mandated the implementation of a national exit-entry tracking system for all aliens, but, none years later, the system is still nowhere near completion.
Today an estimated 12 to20 million illegal aliens are in the United States. They know that if they successfully enter the country and find a job, they will likely be able to stay for the rest of their lives because the government has shown little interest in enforcing its own laws.
Employers also know that once they hire an illegal alien, it is unlikely they will ever be investigated or prosecuted for doing so.
"Enforcement of the laws against illegal immigration and employing illegal aliens is necessary," the members conclude in the letter.
Many members of Congress and even people in the Bush administration have taken advantage of media opportunities to score political points about the failures of our immigration policy that contributed to the disaster of Sept. 11, 2001, and continued threats to this nation. The executive branch has endured intense criticism since the 9-11 attacks.
The administration could use its existing authority to deploy
the U.S. military to protect America's borders.
|Top|
At a time when energy costs have skyrocketed for most Americans, a watchdog group now says, despite the fact that most people use credit card and other financial tools responsibly, they are still being victimized by the unscrupulous, predatory credit card industry.
"Credit card companies have made it harder for families to manage their finances," said Mark Pearce, president of the Center for Responsible Lending, in releasing his report in Washington on Oct. 12.
"Credit card companies not only dictate the terms of the bargain, but they also claim the right to change those terms at any time," Pearce said. "Let me read you a typical line from a credit card contract: ‘We reserve the right to change the terms at any time for any reason.' We recommend that any change in credit card terms apply only to future activity and only after reasonable notice."
If the credit card company "wants to increase my rate to 30 percent, then it should only apply to new purchases, not the charge I made for car repairs last month,'he said.
A customer who even pays his credit card bill on time can still be penalized by the card company if the customer is late paying the phone company or another business, Pearce said. "The card company uses this late payment to another party as an excuse to raise the interest rate on your card," he said.
In addition, even if your credit card payment arrives in the mail on the due date, you can be charged a $35 late fee if the company doesn't have it by a set time, such as 1 p.m., Pearce said. The "late payment" leads not only to a late fee but an interest jump of 25 percent or more, which applies to the entire outstanding balance.
"This year, credit card companies will collect $16 billion in penalty fees alone," Pearce said. "This penalty pricing trap must be dismantled."
Pearce also called for "responsible underwriting" by credit card companies. Five billion credit card solicitations went out last year - an average of 16 solicitations for every man, woman and child in the United States.
"Credit card companies blanket college campuses with solicitations to unemployed students." Pearce said. "Some of the people we contacted in our survey had credit card debt that exceeded their annual incomes."
Customers should have "meaningful access" to justice, Pearce said.
Most credit card companies require that borrowers give up the
right to pursue their claims in a court of law," he said.
"Instead, borrowers must undergo a private system of arbitration,
where fees can be substantial, the scales are tilted toward the
card companies and abuses can be hidden from view."
|Top|
A national tax reform group has blasted a White House panel that quietly met in October to propose drastic changes to the U.S. tax system.
According to Americans for Fair Taxation, the meeting was "fraudulent political theater designed to protect the corrupt tax code and those who profit from its manipulation."
The President's Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform has been charged with formulating recommendations to make the income tax a fairer and more economically productive system. Its final report is due out on Nov. 1.
However, Leo Linbeck, chairman of Americans for Fair Taxation, says he saw through the ruse.
"When a presidential panel engages in such activities it does a great disservice to the people," said Linbeck. "Far from making suggestions for fundamental reform, this panel has actually suggested making the code more complex, more intrusive and more harmful to the economy and the well being of American citizens.
"The panel has thrown up a smokescreen with a fake consumption tax program, continued tinkering with the code at the cost of health care benefits for American workers and recommended a scheme to punish homeowners in high cost areas of the nation in an attempt to solve the problems created by another lobbyist-driven reform which gave us the Alternative Minimum Tax [AMT].
"In addition, the panel wants to enlist credit card companies to monitor spending of Americans and report their findings to the IRS," said Linbeck.
"It is painfully obvious that Washington insiders so closely linked with the status quo cannot be trusted to overturn the corrupt system of federal taxation. This effort will have to be driven by the American people."
The AMT is a piggyback tax within the individual income tax, originally designed to cover wealthy people with an inordinate number of deductions that allow them to escape any tax. Because it is not indexed to inflation, over time it now covers increasing numbers of people who are not rich.
The chief option commission members have put forward is to eliminate the AMT, which would be a tax cut for the relatively wealthy, and to replace the cut revenue by reducing or eliminating deductions for health insurance, home mortgage interest and state and local income tax.
New York lawmakers denounced the tax panel offering of a simplified income tax system that would no longer allow taxpayers to deduct what they pay in state and local taxes.
Said Max B. Sawicky, an economist at the Economic Policy Institute:
"With the death of his Social Security privatization scheme, President Bush is trying to resuscitate his domestic agenda with an electric slide to tax reform. Some things never change: Doubtless, Bush will try to continue comforting the comfortable and afflicting the afflicted by shifting the tax burden from the wealthy to everyone else."
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are
free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American
Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington,
D.C. 20003
|Top|
As more and more Americans feel the pinch of rising gas and oil prices, it is "time for President Bush to get on the phone and make some calls."
That succinct commentary by a network television broadcaster was directed squarely at the Bush administration with the recommendation that someone in the White House call the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and the big oil companies and demand they share some of their soaring profits with strapped U.S. citizens whipsawed between higher prices and static income.
The cost of gasoline is apparent to everyone. But not much has appeared in the national media about the increasing cost of home heating oil.
American Free Press checked on the current costs to heat a home for the coming winter in New York and Virginia, taking these two states as examples of what is likely to occur nationwide.
The worst and most dramatic cost of heating a home is likely to occur for those who use fuel oil and natural gas, which is also up in cost.
In Virginia heating oil stands at about $2.80 per gallon, which makes it about 30 cents more than gasoline at the pump in certain areas.
The most dramatic price change, however, is for kerosene, which many people use to heat their homes, particularly if their tanks are outside and subject to having frost problems. The price for kerosene is hanging at $3.25 per gallon. In New York, the costs of both fuel oil and kerosene are about the same in most locations.
Fuel oil and kerosene dealers with whom American Free Press discussed the matter said they "don't have a clue" in which direction prices will go as winter approaches but that they expect costs to climb.
Petroleum analysts say home heating fuels could jump from 40 to 70 percent before the winter is over.
Likewise, natural gas is expected to rise about 50 percent. Propane, commonly called "bottled gas," will increase by winter's end to about 30 percent.
Those who heat with electricity will also find a modest increase, about 5 percent or $38 for the heating season. Ten years ago, electricity was considered "out of sight" for heating homes and fuel oil and natural gas were offered as cheaper alternatives.
Many analysts contend that big oil companies are gouging American consumers. Crude oil is selling for $64 to $65 per barrel at a cost to produce of about $6 per barrel. Some even suggest oil companies have organized a cabal to keep prices out of sight, demonstrated by the fact that profits are three times what they were a year ago.
American consumers will have a hard time this winter, particularly the elderly on fixed incomes. With the average home in New York requiring from three to four tanks during a heating season, the cost to heat a home with oil will run from $2,400 to well over $3,000.
Both federal and state governments are doing little to compensate for this. In New York, as an example, fuel assistance from the state is at a maximum of $500 this winter, up only $100 from last year.
In Virginia the figures for fuel assistance will not be available until December, but last year assistance ranged from $200 to $300. It could be even lower this year, Social Service workers predict, because more people are applying for it, and there is "only so much available."
Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are
free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American
Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington,
D.C. 20003
|Top|
Homeland security Secretary Michael Chertoff recently said his department aims to expel all those, without exception, who enter the United states illegally. Said Chertoff before a Senate hearing. "Our goal at DHS [Homeland Security] is to completely eliminate the ‘catch and release' enforcement problem, and return every single illegal entrant, no exceptions. It should be possible to achieve significant and measurable progress to this end in less that a year.
"Thousands of Mexicans who are caught entering the United states illegally are returned immediately to Mexico. But other parts of the system have nearly collapsed under the weight of numbers. The problem is especially severe for non-Mexicans apprehended at the southwest border.
"Today, a non-Mexican illegal immigrant caught trying to enter the United States across the southwest border has an 80 percent chance of being released immediately because we lack the holding facilities."
Many Washington watchers were suspicious of Chertoff's latest gambit.
Said Michael W. Cutler, a former senior immigration enforcement special agent who is now a fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington research group, "If you have a boat with numerous holes in it, the boat will sink unless you plug all of the holes effectively. He is only addressing a few of the holes, meaning he may slow the flow but it will not solve the problem in the long run.
The secretary said he intends to bolster the deportation process so that an overwhelmed detention system does not cause illegal immigrants to be set free instead of being sent home.
Hi plans to add beds for detainees, expedite deportations by making more judges and lawyers available, and try to track down more undocumented migrants who do not appear for deportation hearings.
The United states spends $7.3 billion annually to secure its borders, an increase of 58 percent since Sept. 11, 2001. What do U.S. taxpayers get for $20 million per day? The get emergency declarations from the governors of New Mexico and Arizona telling Americans that the international borders of their states are as porous as sieves.
The only way to solve the crisis is to post the U.S. Army on
our Mexican border and to relieve it from guarding the borders
of other countries. This would further prevent our armies from
causing mayhem within the borders of other sovereign nations.
|Top|